ie8 fix
madison

Internet Explorer 9 is released: should you switch?

By | March 14, 2011, 10:06pm PDT

Summary: Tonight, Microsoft officially released Internet Explorer 9 to the public. What’s changed since the Release Candidate? And can IE 9 overcome its Achilles heel?

Microsoft has officially released Internet Explorer 9 to the public.

Although only five weeks have passed between the Release Candidate and the final version available for download now, that time was well spent. Several bugs I had logged in the RC are fixed, and performance is noticeably snappier. And, somewhat surprisingly, two features that weren’t available in the RC made it into the final release:

  • IE 9 now supports the Do Not Track header that Mozilla proposed earlier this year. The feature is in addition to the much more active Tracking Protection feature that blocks third-party tracking sites. According to Rob Mauceri, Principal Group Program Manager for Internet Explorer, Do Not Track is implemented as a header and as part of the Document Object Model (DOM) API. As a result, says Mauceri, “sites can detect a user’s intention not to be tracked.”
  • The Tracking Protection feature now covers ActiveX controls—the most popular of which is Adobe Flash. In the final version of Internet Explorer 9,  requests from ActiveX controls go through the same Tracking Protection Lists that govern websites. If you’ve blocked a third-party site, it will be blocked for access in Flash and other ActiveX controls as well. I’ll need to test this feature to see if it has an impact on local shared objects–aka “Flash cookies.”

If you’ve already downloaded and installed the IE 9 Release Candidate you probably won’t notice any changes. The core of the IE 9 interface is the same as I described last month in my in-depth look at the Release Candidate.

In a follow-up post, I’ll look at how IE 9 compares with its archrivals, Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox. Here’s the executive summary, broken down into four key categories.

Performance: “screamingly faster”

Last week, my colleague Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols benchmarked the performance of Google’s just-released Chrome 10 and called it “screamingly fast.” That conclusion was based on a set of benchmarks that mistakenly compared the unoptimized 64-bit version of Internet Explorer 9 to the 32-bit version of Chrome. When he re-ran the tests, IE 9 came out ahead. I guess that makes the new Internet Explorer “screamingly faster” and, at least for now, dethrones Chrome as the speed king.

My experience with the final release of IE 9 supports that conclusion. In tests on two high-end desktop systems using the SunSpider benchmark, IE 9 came out on top of the just-released Google Chrome 10 by a minimum of 11%. The release candidate of Firefox 4 actually outperformed Chrome ontwo of three systems but was still 12.6% slower than IE 9. On a notebook using an ultra-low-voltage Core 2 Duo processor, the difference was even more profound: Firefox 4 and Chrome 10 needed 24% and 29% more time to finish the benchmark than IE 9.

The most important measure of performance, of course, is the real world. So I set up a test bed with browsers arranged side by side on PCs with similar configurations and found the differences between the three leading browsers to be minimal in everyday use. On graphically intensive pages, IE 9 was often able to finish loading a page faster than Chrome. The difference was especially noticeable on systems using older GPUs. The only significant differences I found were on sites that use cutting-edge HTML5 features, where the difference came down to differences in how each browser handles an emerging standard.

Page 2: IE 9’s Achilles Heel  –>

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
236
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Internet Explorer 9 is released: should you switch?
lyncarmel Updated - 17th Oct
I don't have any problems with browsers. I use IE 9, Chrome, Firefox and Opera for different sites such as ad network , dating forum and recipe search .I even open and use these browsers at the same time and I'm fine with them.
0 Votes
+ -
The biggest thing Microsoft has to fight is itself with the upgrade, simply because of all the legacy code that exists for all the previous IE versions on websites out there.

Otherwise, it's a fantastic improvement of a version, and I'm looking forward to seeing what IE 10 will have, because I'd imagine Microsoft is beginning work on that.
@clindhartsen
As a major Firefox fan, I find myself a little bit shocked that I am now an evangelist for the *second* best browser out there -- and that the crown wasn't taken by Google. I really expected Chrome to be the first to pass Firefox in speed, polish and usability, but alas, it was IE! Crazy...

The bottom line is, however, that there is *very* little daylight between these browsers at this point. Any fair-minded person would have to conclude that all three are very, very nice pieces of software. I haven't spent any real time in Opera, but I'm told there is even a fourth, excellent choice out there, too.

One thing I don't like is the move toward maximizing the browsing space at the expense of nice large buttons across the top. I don't need those extra few pixels, and prefer bigger, more obvious buttons. If I need a lot of real-estate, I just push F11. I blame Google for making their butt-ugly user interface "standard" on other browsers. I'm sure there'll be themes for Firefox 4 that make it look like 3.
0 Votes
+ -
@jdakula You "blame Google" for "making their butt-ugly user interface standard on other browsers"?

How, exactly, did Google force other browsers to copy it? Google did something a little different and, in this free market, they - of their own volition - decided to emulate it.

How is that Google's fault, except for making something worth copying?

I suppose next you'll blame Apple for "making" their touch interface standard on other phones and tablets, too?
0 Votes
+ -
It's not that simple
kevlar700 15th Mar 2011
@jdakula
Having made a website which scales itself to your screensize in multiple directions. I can tell you that different browsers do render at different speeds. There are settings deliverable by websites that speed up that rendering and slow it down in the case of IE 6-8 for sure. Fonts and images are rendered atleast before IE9 to a higher quality in firefox and fonts especially in chrome/safari. I was going to add an instruction to my site to make it look better on IE but it was far too slow when I did.

Security is my number one concern for a web browser and I leave javascript off most of the time which is why it is annoying when people say chrome is soo fast. It's slower at rendering than firefox.

p.s.
IE is banished from my networks as it spends most of it's life unpatched!! (except for testing machines and occasionally if the update system breaks.)
@jdakula

I think firefox still has a much better development environment, opportunity for customization, and this simple comfort that when I tinker with a website I am much better able to predict the outcome. IE 9 is a huge improvement over all IE that came before, but it's still a second string browser.
I started using Opera's in the later half of 1990's. In my opinion it has always been the best. It has always been the fastest to download, install, and use. Opera back then was the only browser with tabs that could zoom in or out by simply hitting the + or - keys. Then it was only 4mb download compared to IE 11mb download. It has always been a leader in browser innovations and security. Opera also is the same on Linux as MS Windows computers. My Moto Q smart phone came with Opera and I will be using it on a Motorola Atrix 4G when I get it next month. Opera has much more to offer small button or large just find a skin you like or make your own. many other features you most likely have not heard of. It's only problem is that legacy code on some popular sites not only target a specific Internet Explorer version they also exclude Opera and other open source software.

I like to see Ed Bott through Opera into the mix and see his opinion.
0 Votes
+ -
@jdakula With Firefox 4 you just choose: Firefox-menu, preferences -> show menu bar. And it's pretty close to having Firefox 3.x interface again.
I am very much impressive to read this post. Great informative, I will go to bookmarking this. sukhumvit hotels
Alain, thanks for your detailed report. I think you have done the right thing: SPSS HelpSecure Internet Explorer 9 to protect the operating system.
0 Votes
+ -
@clindhartsen I'd like to see IE 64 run simple plugins, like silverlight. I'm tired of switching back to IE32 all the time.
@LarsDennert My advice is to simply use IE9 32 bit for everything, there's zero reason to use 64 bit.
@LarsDennert : wow... so IE9 64 is iOS compatible. What a move forward. LOL!!!

As for uses for 64-bit, let count all embedded applications (Outlook, MS Help, WinForms, etc etc.) which are going to suffer Microsoft decision to "nograde" IE9.
@LarsDennert

"As for uses for 64-bit, let count all embedded applications (Outlook, MS Help, WinForms, etc etc.) which are going to suffer Microsoft decision to 'nograde' IE9."

They're designed around earlier versions of IE, which are even slower then IE9 64 bit, so this isn't really an issue.

And they're not particularly script heavy anyways. They're not big web apps.
@clindhartsen
9 is just released today and you are looking to 10? Why don't you stop being a chump and look forward to version 15 or even version 20.
0 Votes
+ -
That's the way the tech-world works...
EnKrptyed 15th Mar 2011
@skytop1 ... the instant something's on the market, there's already a new version coming! Did that thought even occur to you, or was the temptation to make a "joke" about how someone else chooses to think just too great to pass up? How about you stop being the chump you accuse clindhartsen of and put your brain in gear for something useful rather than trying to trash on somebody for being interested in what's coming!
0 Votes
+ -
@clindhartsen just wondering why opera's not in the list, i've done a sunspider benchmark with opera (Current Version) against Chrome (Developer Version with HW-Acceleration). The Results were really impressive: Opera was EVERYWHERE faster then Chrome, most of the time 2x on other tests it was 3-4 times faster then chrome. So i really stick with Opera, at least on my slower netbook.
@clindhartsen
My PC suffered a BSOD after installing IE9. I am running Win7-32Bit. Uninstalling it did not help. Others are having similar problems and some have mentioned doing a System Restore... that's my next step.
@clindhartsen : the theme goes on and on, in an apparent loop.

"Companies holding off upgrades to Windows 7 strangled by internal IE6-only sites".

"Windows Mobile market share slipping due to switch by users to Android, Windows Phone 7 not an option due to lack of compatibility"

"Companies abandon Visual Basic in favor of Java due to no clear upgrade path from Visual Basic 6 to Visual Basic.NET"

"Windows 8: riskiest Windows release. Steve Ballmer. Analysts say reason might be compatibility of SoC implementations with old software".

"IE9 64-bit slower than 32-bit. Development team attributes problem to focus on 32-bit to allow compatibility with current 32-bit add-ons"

I guess they should now focus on IE9 64-bit and change the name to something like Internet Expedition, Internet Excursion or even Internet Trek, so companies know that it breaks from the past now and forever.
0 Votes
+ -
enjoy it happy
www.awwgame.com
The Tracking Protection feature now covers ActiveX controls???the most popular of which is Adobe Flash. In the final version of Internet Explorer 9, requests from ActiveX controls go through the same Tracking Protection Lists that govern websites. hair school
0 Votes
+ -
If you Install Google toolbar IE 9 may crash on close. It did for me anyway so had to unistall it.

The TPL is not as great as adblocker plus is for Firefox even through it has the same list EasyList. Facebook for example I still see ads where as in Firefox I don't.
0 Votes
+ -
@Randalllind Try this cross browser solution that make TPL redundant, it works on Chrome FF and IE
www.breadcrumbssolutions.com
@Randalllind TPL? What is that?
0 Votes
+ -
@CobraA1 I think "TPL" in this case is "third-party list" for the filtering tech in the browser.
0 Votes
+ -
@g_keramidas@... Strange, the original NY Times site worked fine on first load with IE9 64 bit, but didn't on first load in the 32 bit version. on second attempt to load it into the 64 bit version, it faild to show the slider.

The MSNBC worked fine for both 32 and 64 bit versions.
@Ross Snowden To be fair, the MSNBC page is just a click to slide, while the NYT one makes you drag to view the pages.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Internet Explorer 9 is released: should you switch?
Hallowed are the Ori 15th Mar 2011
To be fair, the MSNBC page is just a click to slide,
**************************************

No it isn't. There's also a big square slider at the BOTTOM of the image to slide left and right to view the before and after versions of the photos.
0 Votes
+ -
@Ross Snowden

NYT page appears to be working correctly now.
BUGGGGGGG
0 Votes
+ -
@turkin@...
buggggggs is what your head's filled with!
0 Votes
+ -
Not localized for Win 7 Ultimate
Arman5 14th Mar 2011
Don't install it if you have Windows Ultimate and use language packs - this POS is not localized for Windows Ultimate language packs, unlike any other major browser. MS blew it.
0 Votes
+ -
@Arman5 ... I think you're missing something, because according to the download site, it's available in 39 languages.
@GoodThings2Life: "available" for download but not installation - whatever language version you download, the installer forces you to the default release language of your copy of Windows, NOT the language you downloaded. Once installed, IE9 fails to switch to the language pack to which Win 7 Ultimate UI is currently set. Got it? Whatever.
I did a quick check and compared IE9, Chrome and Firefox using the fishtank. IE9 and Chrome are pretty much close. Firefox is the slowest. IE9 FTW!
0 Votes
+ -
The biggest flaw....
doh123 15th Mar 2011
the biggest flaw is that it only runs on Windows...
0 Votes
+ -
@doh123

Windows Vista and 7, around 40% of the user base.
Strange how reviews seem to gloss over this fact.
0 Votes
+ -
@Chipesh You mean, strange that a company thumbed its nose at 60% of the user base?

I use Opera, and Chrome, and Firefox, for various reasons, on Ubuntu and (when I must) Windows XP and Windows 7. They all appear to have been able to figure out how to build cross-platform browsers.

But then again, maybe they're just smarter. One of the key reasons I switched from Windows Live Mesh to Dropbox is precisely because Dropbox works cross-platform and Live Mesh only works on Windows.

Certain apps ought to be platform-neutral and a browser is one of them.
0 Votes
+ -
@Chipesh Oh, you would rather Microsoft kept supporting a 10-year old OS that's causing nothing but problems?
0 Votes
+ -
@doh123

That is not entirely because of Microsoft's decision making. Apple was a major player of putting the stop to IE on MacOS back on IE version 5 and Linux on the desktop is not used widely enough to justify the development of IE for that and I am pretty sure that it would be rejected anyway.

IE9 is not on XP because XP at it's core cannot support the advanced features of IE9 and the changes made to make it faster and more secure. I am sure they can make a version of IE and call it IE9 for XP but it would not offer any advantage over IE8 on a older Operating System that is end of life like XP. In fact you may have noticed that even IE8 does not support protected mode on XP (at least that I am aware of).

Now before anyone goes off on how Microsoft is evil for not supporting XP other companies like Apple do not either. Safari 5.0 requires OS X 10.5.8 or newer according to its system requirements page. Sometimes when software is upgraded to take advantage of modern operating systems older OSes get left behind.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: The biggest flaw
erlewis@... 15th Mar 2011
@bobiroc Thanks for adding your sensible remarks. Sadly, many postings I see add only to the clutter around the sensible remarks. erlewis
0 Votes
+ -
@bobiroc

XP sux0r. But there are those luddites that'll piss and moan because their precious isn't supported anymore.
@bobiroc Thanks for the information that IE9 does not work on XP. I have stayed with XP on one PC due to legacy programs which do what I want much better than their upgrades. Nowhere in other places could I find the information you gave.
0 Votes
+ -
@bobiroc
And yet, all the other browsers having no problem implementing hardware acceleration (etc.) on the "lowly" Windows XP -- and those browsers are neck-and-neck with IE9.

Microsoft's whining about integration with the OS is stupid. No one wants a new paradigm for browsing. They've done this before with "Active Desktop" back in IE 4.0 (anyone here old enough to remember that?) They wanted us to have a desktop filled with little ActiveX widgets -- it didn't take off.

Most people just want a browser with RSS feed, favorites (bookmarks), etc. and they want to browse the Web in their BROWSER -- imagine that!
@bobiroc -- "Now before anyone goes off on how Microsoft is evil for not supporting XP other companies like Apple do not either. Safari 5.0 requires OS X 10.5.8 or newer according to its system requirements page. " -- Your comparison is not really fair. Apple has only a small PC market share while IE has a much bigger one. And 60% (if it's true) of Windows users are still using XP because of software compatibility issues. To ignore XP users is simply trying to force them to spend more money to upgrade to Vista or 7, which I think is a dirty tactic. Firefox has a lot of upgrades since I used it from the day it first came out, and they support ALL Windows versions for all upgrades, so why can't IE?
0 Votes
+ -
That is not entirely because of Microsoft's decision making. Apple was a major player of putting the stop to IE on MacOS back on IE version 5

Please cite where Apple has done that and not Micro$oft.

and Linux on the desktop is not used widely enough to justify the development of IE for that and I am pretty sure that it would be rejected anyway.

Please cite where Linux has rejected that. Or is this all just unfounded speculation on your part.
0 Votes
+ -
@LTV

Perhaps you should learn to read?

The Linux community isn't large enough for Microsoft to waste its time building IE for it. All 12 Linux users can whine all they want, but it's the truth. Also, since they are NOT going to make IE open source, even fewer will want it.

As for Mac, maybe you're just too young to remember Apple kicking everyone and their grandma off their app development?
@ matthewlinux

'And yet, all the other browsers having no problem implementing hardware acceleration (etc.) on the "lowly" Windows XP'

Of course they're having problems with XP: that's why they're only implementing partial hardware acceleration on it. Full 2D hardware acceleration on Windows uses the Direct2D API, which is only available on Vista and 7. XP simply can't do it. IE9 also uses security features in Windows Vista/7 that are missing in XP.

Browser developers can only take advantage of things like Direct2D, ASLR, etc. on Windows 7 and Vista. For XP, they therefore face a simple choice: offer a degraded experience (slower, less secure) to XP users or simply don't support XP. Microsoft have taken the latter route. Mozilla (and probably Google) are taking the former. However, there's no magic involved: neither Firefox nor Chrome will give XP users the benefits IE9 users get on Windows 7 and Vista.
@bobiroc

Funny, a tiny not-for-profit like Mozilla manages to support the Linux desktop just fine.
0 Votes
+ -
tkejlboom?
Will Farrell 15th Mar 2011
@bobiroc
Funny, a tiny not-for-profit like Mozilla manages to support the Linux desktop just fine.

Please list the benefits to MS for creating and maintaining IE for Linux. Better yet, why did Google stop supporting Mozilla?
0 Votes
+ -
I don't have any problems with browsers. I use IE 9, Chrome, Firefox and Opera for different sites such as ad network , dating forum and recipe search .I even open and use these browsers at the same time and I'm fine with them.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix